Hayes wrote between 2004-2007 that he was the responsible person for a “whole NT planned.”

Hayes wrote that he had “majority input” for this “whole NT planned.”

Al-Injil contains plagiarized material of three MIT versions for which Hayes had “significant input” or represents material for which the rights were either obtained or retained.

Al-Injil contains unique elements from three MIT versions for which Hayes’ had “significant input” that would correspond to a “whole NT” for which he had the “majority input.”

Hayes belongs to the organization, Trac5, which describes him as having translated both the Bible and the Qur’an.

Hayes has personally sold boxed, shrink-wrapped copies of Al-Injil along with new copies of The Arabic-English Reference Qur’an of which he had quantities of both in his car. I have documentation that Hayes was indeed the primary translator of this version of the Qur’an. The implication is that Hayes was selling his own works for which he was the primary translator.

Hayes has shown in conversation an intimate awareness of details of Al-Injil on two separate occasions to three different people known to me. All of them have told me that they suspect that Hayes was involved in its production. One of them is convinced that Hayes is “deeply involved” (see quote below).

Hayes has an established pattern of seeking to maintain anonymity by working “behind the scenes” with regard to IM productions which includes MIT. The lack of Hayes’ outward identification with Al-Injil is in keeping with this behavior.

Hayes has been inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest in at least some of his writings regarding the Bible, Islam, and how he portrays someone opposed to IM.

In the following section, I provide greater details for these points. I hope that you will take the time to read them and do what you can to promote the distribution of genuine translations of Scripture among Muslims (as well as all peoples!). Scripture translation is the foundation for all that Christians believe. If a “translation” results in an alteration of its message, that production presents “another Gospel” (2 Cor 11:4; Gal 1:6-9). Unlike the Gospel, “another Gospel” cannot save anyone from sin, coinciding in reconciliation with God the Father through faith in His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, in conjunction with the convincing and regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

May we be imitators of the Apostle Paul and his co-workers, when he wrote:

Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart, 2 but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God… (2 Cor 4:1-2)

Nine Reasons Further Explained

Jeff Hayes indicated between 2004-2007, in the Word document he authored, “Current Status of Arabic Scriptures with special emphasis on applicability to Insider Movements of Muslims,” that he himself was the responsible person for a “whole NT planned” (NT = New Testament) in Arabic, specifically said to be “appropriate for an insider movement.”

The following is a screen shot from the details tab of this document, followed by the text of what is within the screen shot:

Al-Injil, with a publication date corresponding to 2012-2013, fits the descriptions of a “whole NT” in Arabic that is “appropriate for an insider movement” by reason of its wording (for specific examples of this wording the reader is referred to my earlier article, which link was given above). The time frame of its publication date, along with its now current distribution, is consistent with a “translation” that was only in its beginning stages between 2004-2007.

Jeff Hayes indicated that he was providing the “majority input” for this “whole NT planned.” It is completely fair to attribute a literary work to the person who has provided its majority input.

Unless permissions were obtained or retained, Al-Injil contains plagiarized material from three previous Arabic “Muslim Idiom Translations” (MIT) versions. It seems more likely that someone who admitted to having “significant input” for these previous MIT versions simply retained his rights to specific wording that he provided for them. This wording was then used in his “whole NT.”

I gave a number of specific examples in my earlier article where Al-Injil has very similar wording and features and identical wording and features in identical passages within Sirat Al-Masih, the Sharif Bible, and The True Meaning of the Gospel of Christ (True Meaning).

The identical features and wording of Al-Injil with these three previously published Arabic MIT versions (see point 3) point very strongly to Hayes being the person responsible for these features and wording. Jeff Hayes wrote that he provided “significant input” for Sirat Al-Masih, the Sharif Bible, and True Meaning. Hayes also wrote that he was providing “majority input” for a “whole NT.”

Hayes wrote regarding Sirat Al-Masih that there were “some copyright problems due to David Owen withdrawing previously given permission” (which I quoted in my earlier article). Since Owen withdrew his “previously given permission,” the shared features between Sirat Al-Masih and Al-Injil point to someone who retained the right to use his own input for future use. Hayes indicated that he had “significant input” for Sirat Al-Masih. The use of such material in a “whole NT planned” for which he was the responsible party and provided its “majority input” exactly corresponds to Al-Injil.

Prior to the publication of Al-Injil, one of the distinctive features of the Sharif Bible, when compared to other Arabic MIT versions, was its incorporation of the first part of the shahāda, or Islamic confession of faith (i.e. “There is no god but God”). This phrase is prominently noted in a chart that is placed on an unnumbered page after the table of contents for the Old and New Testaments. It seems highly improbable that “Subhi Malik” (i.e. Sobhi Malek), the responsible party for the Sharif Bible, would give permission to a rival MIT version involving the use of an Islamic phrase that had thus far distinguished it from other Arabic MIT versions.

Although Hayes provided “significant input” for the Sharif Bible, he was not very complimentary of it. I re-quote this part of his description of it (see my earlier article for the complete quote):

Language is VERY simple – intended for barely literate. Mazhar Mallouhi (see below) says it reads like a translation done by a Westerner. Clearer meaning but not beautiful. Uses Muslim names, but otherwise has not adapted to Muslim audiences. Best option in print [for an insider movement [sic]].”

In light of Hayes’ overall disappointment with the Sharif Bible, its identical wording with Al-Injil, especially when found in identical passages, point to someone who not only sought to retain the parts with which he was in agreement, but for which he also retained the rights to use in the future, such as a “whole NT planned.” All of these things precisely correspond to Al-Injil.

True Meaning contains unique features that are also found in Al-Injil (see my earlier article for specific examples). As with the Sharif Bible, it seems less probable that Mazhar Mallouhi and his organization would grant permission to a rival MIT version

to use some of its unique material. It seems much more likely that someone like Hayes, who provided “significant input” for True Meaning, retained the right to use this “significant input” for his own “majority input” for his “whole NT.” Al-Injil perfectly fits this description.

In further keeping with one who provided “significant input” and desire for Scripture “translations” that are “appropriate for an insider movement,” Hayes left the following comment for True Meaning on Amazon.co.uk, for which he gave it a rating of 5 out of 5 stars (Hayes’ review can be found here under “Customer Reviews”):

5.0 out of 5 stars Great for Muslim friends
By J. C. Hayes on 17 Dec. 2014

Those Muslim friends I have given it to have loved it. It is relevant, speaks their language, and the introductory articles are very helpful. This is intended for Muslims, not Christians, so Christians and converts to Christianity may not like it. It seems that some of the other reviewers are not of the targeted audience. For Arabic-speaking Christians, who do not like the Muslim religious terminology, there are several other translations available.

Unlike the Sharif Bible, Hayes was pleased with the overall production of True Meaning. Nevertheless, as with the Sharif Bible, the use of identical wording, often in identical passages, points to a person retaining the rights to his own work for use in later publications. Since Hayes admitted to having “significant input” in True Meaning and “majority input” for a “whole NT” it seems highly unlikely that Al-Injil is the work of someone other than Hayes.

Jeff Hayes belongs to the organization, Trac5, which I noted in my earlier article (see footnote 1). In its description for Hayes we find the following:

Through his translation company, he translates Arabic – English and English – Arabic for businesses, government, and religious groups, including Bible and Qur’an translation. [emphasis added]

This description confirms Hayes’ “translation” efforts as indicated in his Word document, “Current Status of Arabic Scriptures with special emphasis on applicability to Insider Movements of Muslims.” These efforts include a “whole NT planned.” Al-Injil is in keeping with the Trac5 description of Hayes’ efforts for “Bible…translation.”

The Trac5 description also confirms Hayes’ role in a recent translation of the Qur’an into English. On June 7, 2010, Hayes sent out the “first draft” of this Qur’an by email attachment. The file is named, “Qur’an translation JH 2.2” and is 1, 759 KB, or 1.7 MB. The following is the text of the email:

From: Jeff Hayes [email address removed]
Date: 2010/6/7
Subject: first draft complete
To:
Dear brothers and sisters,
I am attaching the finished first draft of the complete Qur’an. As you will see, there are many footnotes, giving parallel passages in the other books (Bible/ Tawrah + Zabur + Injeel).
This is the time when I can use as much feedback as possible:
1) alternate phrasing that sounds better in English
2) parallel passages that I have not mentioned
3) passages where other translations differ significantly, which need footnotes.
We are hoping to have all the editing done by the end of August, so if you have time to look at any of it this summer, that would be very helpful.
Sincerely,
Your brother Jeff

Hayes’ email was forwarded to me on June 9, 2010:

From: [name and email address removed]
To: [the author’s email address removed]
Subject: Fwd: first draft complete
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 22:12:03 -0700
Hey Adam, I thought you may like to have this newly translated version of the Qur’an, done by Jeff Hayes. He’s an IM [i.e. “Insider Movement”] proponent, so I thought you’d be a good person to look at it for accuracy.

The person who sent me the email had been taught by Hayes on multiple occasions. He maintains at least occasional contact with him through email. This person, who knows and interacts with Hayes, attributes this translation of the Qur’an to Hayes. The attached file also bears his initials, “JH.”

The copy of Al-Injil that I have was bought directly from Hayes for US$35 who had copies of it in his car. The one that I received was shrink-wrapped, in a specially-fitted, unmarked cardboard box. He was also selling The Arabic-English Reference Qur’an for which he was the primary translator (I did a brief comparison of the 2.2 version which Hayes sent out by email with the published 3.0 version. This comparison confirms that the majority of the text that I read is identical to Hayes’ earlier version regardless of the following attribution of authorship to a committee:

The translation committee, a partnership of sincere Muslim and Christian Arabic scholars… 2

As Hayes was selling his own work, The Arabic-English Reference Qur’an, it would be consistent that his sale of Al-Injil is also an indication that he was selling another one of his productions, namely, the completed product of his “whole NT planned.”

Hayes spoke of Al-Injil in great detail to the person from whom I received a copy, revealing that he is intimately aware of its entire production, including its wording. This has been confirmed to me by others who spoke with him on a later separate occasion. Here is a summary from the latter conversation:

He at first was evasive and did not want to admit involvement. Then we pressed him and he knows a lot about the translation. I am personally convinced he is deeply involved.

Hayes has an established pattern of seeking to maintain anonymity with regard to MIT and other IM productions. In the Word document, “Current Status of Arabic Scriptures with special emphasis on applicability to Insider Movements of Muslims,” there is a section entitled, “Evangelistic materials for an insider movement (awaiting funding for publishing in Lebanon).” Fourteen items are mentioned. All except one have either 2 or 3 asterisks preceding the titles, indicating that Hayes had either “significant input” or “majority input.” Where named, all of the “authors” have different names. The following chart lists the tracts in the order in which they appear in Hayes’ list:

Degree of Hayes’ Input

Title of Tract

Stated Author (and year)

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Acceptable Fast

Saber Khalil, 1997

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Way to an Acceptable Fast

Saber Khalil, 2004

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Secrets of the Blessed Feast Eid Al-Adha

Ali Mansour, 1999

*** (i.e. majority input)

Jesus Christ is Imprisoned??

Hadi Wehbeh, 2000

*** (i.e. majority input)

Our Master Christ Jesus – Whose Son is He?

Issa Abdul Majeed, 2000

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Horrors of Judgment Day or the Gardens of Delight?

Abdul Rahman Qassem, 2001

*** (i.e. majority input)

The True Jihad

Saleh Alnouri, 2002

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Lost Names of God

Abdullah Al-Qadi, 2003

*** (i.e. majority input)

The Islamic View of the film “The Passion of the Christ”

Ali Hadi Alnouri, 2004

*** (i.e. majority input)

Errors of the Christians and Jews

No name or date given, only: “in progress”

*** (i.e. majority input)

May God cover you

No name or date given, only: “in progress”

** (i.e. significant input)

The Hand of Blessing

Jama’at Al Barakah, 2004

no asterisks given

Prayer for Healing

No author given, just the following date: “2001?” and that it is: ” Arabic only”

** (i.e. significant input)

Theological Principles from the Tawrat, Zabur, Injeel and Koran

Fouad Accad (Lebanese), Navpress, 1979

With the exception of Fouad Accad, who is known to have been a real person and not a pseudonym, it would seem that some, or perhaps all of the “authors” of these tracts represent pseudonyms used by Hayes. Even if this is not the case, Hayes’ “significant input” and “majority input” are nevertheless being masked. This is in keeping with what we have already seen regarding his work on Arabic MIT versions.

Paper presented at the Bridging the Divide conference, Houghton College, Houghton, NY, June 20-24, 2011. Printed here by permission of the author.

This paper was originally entitled, “Jeff Hayes’ Oral Response to “Early Gentile Christianity, Conversion, and Culture-Shift in the New Testament,” by Terence Paige Presented at BtD 2011, supplementing Hayes’ written response sent as pre-reading.” It can be found here. That Al-Injil does not bear Hayes’ name is consistent with his pattern of anonymity for MIT and other “Insider Movement” material.

Hayes has been known to be inaccurate, misleading, and dishonest in at least some of his material.

With regard to the tract, “The True Jihad,” by Saleh Alnouri, mentioned above, its text was posted on the “Jesus in the Qur’an” (JIQ; now, Jesus and the Qur’an) website in 2009, under the website title, “What is Jihad in the Qur’an?,” followed by its regular title (i.e. “The True Jihad”). 3 It was pulled soon after an email was sent to the Jesus in the Qur’an website on May 5, 2009. This email was sent by a friend of mine who has extensive knowledge of the Sira, i.e. the purported biography of Muhammad. The following is the text of his email:

Hi JIQ,
Recently someone pointed me to your site and I took a look at your article, http://www.jesusinthequran.org/?p=167I found the article to be inaccurate. There were incomplete references given, incomplete discussions of Quranic verses, omission of other Islamic source material, and a variety of other errors that all in all make the article untrue. I don’t know if you wrote that article out of ignorance, or a bias to whitewash the Quran. I don’t know your motives or background, I only know that the article is inaccurate. I also know that jihad in the Quran, and more importantly in Islam, is primarily violent.
If you would like to read a counterpoint to your article, have a look at http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/swordverse.htmIslam’s teachings extend well beyond the Quran and it is somewhat deceitful of you to frame an argument based upon the Quran solely. If you’re going to teach about Islam, then do it properly. Otherwise you are misleading your readers.

Whether or not “Saleh Alnouri” is a pseudonym for Hayes, his “majority input” in this tract was stated to be inaccurate on a number of levels, as well as misleading, by someone quite knowledgeable with one of the most important literary works within Islam. For JIQ to pull the text of this tract on the basis of general criticism reveals a great lack of confidence on their part in Hayes’ scholarship to withstand critique.

In the previous point (see #8 above) Hayes was positively identified as “Michael Roberts” in UIM. In addition to the article referenced in #8, Hayes (a.k.a. “Roberts”) also co-authored the article for Chapter 22 (pp. 199-212), “Conversion in the New Testament,” with a “Richard Jameson.”

Fred Farrokh points out in his review of Understanding Insider Movements that Hayes (a.k.a. “Roberts”) and “Jameson” were dishonest in their quoting of Terence Paige (see the section, “Airtight Scholarship”). They make it appear that Paige is supportive of Insider Movements when in fact he is not. This is what Farrokh wrote:

In this case, UIM authors were willing to quote a NT scholar out of context to enlist his service for the IM [i.e. “Insider Movement”] paradigm which he was in fact critiquing. Roberts [i.e. Hayes] was also present at the meeting, so he has little excuse for this misrepresentation. I only researched this because I was present at the said paper and knew I detected dishonesty.

Conclusion

In light of the nine reasons presented above, I am convinced that Hayes is the primary “translator” and responsible party for Al-Injil. These reasons are based on, first and foremost, Hayes’ own writings; Hayes’ behavioral patterns; and the testimonies of both those who agree and disagree with him. I have presented relevant and verifiable documentation, much of which is from material that Hayes himself has distributed. If you have not yet read my earlier article, “Jeff Hayes and Al-Injil,” I urge you to do so without which this article is incomplete.

I use quotation marks because I do not want to give any appearance that somehow I am validating that what Hayes does with “Muslim Idiom Translation” (MIT) is translation. MIT products are willful mistranslations of the divinely-inspired text of Scripture. ↩

The Reference Qur’an Council, The Arabic-English Reference Qur’an: The First Translation of the Qur’an from the Original Arabic into Modern English with References to the Tawrah, Zabur, and Injil, version 3.0 (n.p., n.p., September 2015), v. ↩

Like this:

About Author

Adam Simnowitz is a minister with the Assemblies of God. He lives in Dearborn, MI. He recently completed his M.A. thesis, "Muslim Idiom Translation: Assessing So-Called Scripture Translation For Muslim Audiences With A Look Into Its Origins In Eugene A. Nida's Theories Of Dynamic Equivalence And Cultural Anthropology."
He was one of the contributing authors to the adopted Assemblies of God paper, "The Necessity for Retaining Father and Son Terminology in Scripture Translations for Muslims," from which this paper is partially drawn (http://fatherson.ag.org/).